The Religous Right

[jonb]

Originally posted by Freddie53@Jul 13 2005, 11:53 PM
About the theocratic men. Our Constitution and Bill of Rights that was ratified by every state coming into the union, is really based on the ancient Greek and Roman Republic, NOT ROMAN EMPIRE, models.

[post=329024]Quoted post[/post]​

Err . . . Try again. The Romans in particular would elect the Senate who would then appoint two consuls or one dictator. Not a very democratic system.

Although there was a Roman orator named Seneca, two of them actually. LOL Maybe that's where you're confused?

But the Iroquois didn't have a head of state per se; instead they had 50 royaneh, all males, who could be impeached by the women in their respective clans.

Internationally, Indian clothes still represent freedom when used in protest, and indeed Indian outfits have been used in such places as Johannesburg, Seattle, and most recently in protest of the Iraq war and in Kiev.

 

[SomeGuyOverThere]

Personally I find the terms "Relgious" and "Right" used together as an oxymoron.

I would say that most major religions + Buddhism (which is more a phillosiphy), are very left wing in nature.

From my little knowledge ofthe different holy texts, and my basic education in the different religions as well as the conversations I've held with Christian Priests and even Bishops, as far as I can see: Relgioin is positively marxist in nature.

Mainstream Religion is all about people working together, being unjudgemental, and open minded, about being as helpfull and find to those around you as is possible.

They are about everyone pulling together and working for a better future, and those that do work for a better future and do help those aronud them, are rewarded after death in one way or another, those who are devisive, cruel, hatefull, spitfull, intollerant and judgemental are punished in one way or another after death.

The Political Right is all about personal gain, and the opertunity for everyone to make personal gain.

The Political Left are all about everyone pulling together and working for a better future fr everyone.

Therefore, in basic terms, mainstream religion is Left Wing.

Therefore the extreme Right wing religious groups and the Evangelical types are the ones who, according to the very religion they express they believe in, will be punished after their deaths.


This is just a gernal overview BTW, I dont want to get bogged down in debate, because nobody ever convinces anyone anything, I'm just voicing my opinion.



Slightly Off Topic, there is a fanatical Islamic preacher who was hanging about in the UK preaching about killing the infidels etc. Thing was, he had actually lost both hands to accidents while bomb making, and had two hooks aswell (IIRC) as an eyepatch.

Something my cousin pointed out:
"You'd have thought that after loseing both hands making bmbs to blow people up, that he'd have maybe figured that perhaps God was trying to tell him something... like "stop making bombs you moron!" "

 

[Bananaman]

I've only got one thing to say to these miserable holier-than-thou cretins. When they inform me that I'm most assuredly going to hell, my answer is always the same: "See you there!" If I keep going here, I'll start ranting so 'nuff said!

B-man

 

[13788]

hondo62: It's a sad fact that these evangilists are using the fears, shaky faith and insecurities of people to fuel their agendas. I take no stock in their preachings. I follow the simple rules laid out by Christ to guarantee my salvation. I especially like the one "Do unto others....." As for the rest of you, what you do or how you act is your own business. Damnation or salvation, you'll find out with the maker when the time comes. These acts of God caused by individuals behavior is something I can not believe in. I personally think that God is a hands off type of guy/girl. We were put here, He gave us some direction, and at times intervened but now we are on our own.

 

[jay_too]

B-man..

Fundamental Christians do come in many flavors. I worked in Tennessee for a year or so and got to know many. Do I understand them? Nah. Probably, my closest friend in the office was deeply devout and a really nice guy. Several mutual friends told me to be careful because the dude knew that I was going to HELL. One day after racquetball, while we were showering, I asked him if it was true that he believed I was going to hell. His answer was, "Yea."

Why? He told me, "It is obvious you are not a born again." Obviously, the conversation continued for a while; but this was the essential truth. Everytime he comes out on business we get together. We remain friends.

I thought this was really strange until I read that Russell Crowe [or somebody] was happily married but was convinced that his wife was going to hell.

I have no problem with people who try to live "the good life" and search for personal answers in the Bible. I do have problems with those who spout verses in games of oneupmanship. I despise the hypocrites who use Brand X for personal gain....be it power or money or sex.

jay

 

[Freddie53]

Originally posted by jonb+Jul 14 2005, 06:10 PM--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(jonb &#064; Jul 14 2005, 06:10 PM)</div><div class='quotemain'><!--QuoteBegin-Freddie53@Jul 13 2005, 11:53 PM
About the theocratic men. Our Constitution and Bill of Rights that was ratified by every state coming into the union, is really based on the ancient Greek and Roman Republic, NOT ROMAN EMPIRE, models.

[post=329024]Quoted post[/post]​

Err . . . Try again. The Romans in particular would elect the Senate who would then appoint two consuls or one dictator. Not a very democratic system.

Although there was a Roman orator named Seneca, two of them actually. LOL Maybe that&#39;s where you&#39;re confused?

[post=329216]Quoted post[/post]​

[/b][/quote]
Jonb, you may be right. If you are you need to contact the people who publish all the World History books used in sixth grade and 10th grade. The "dictator" was onlly appointed when there was a need for "martial Law"

According to the many different companies books that were adopted by schools and I served as chair of the adoption committee for the social studies one year, Greece was the birthplace of democracy. Athens was a truly democratic city. Sparta was not. The early Roman Republic was a re[resentative democracy. The patiritians or upper class elected the Senate. The lower class elected a house as well. The name escapes me but the consults could veto actions by the Senate but the idea of a two house Congress came directly from the Roman Republic. Check your history books. The framers saw the problems in the Roman Republic and put in a system of checks and balances which ware lacking in the Roman Republic. This was the point I was making. Many other cultures had a system that was democratic. But the Framers were enamored with Greece and Rome and just improved a bunch on what they had.

My point was missed. The Framers set up a non sectariian, a secular government, not a theocracy. That was the point I was trying to make. They were aware that the Puritans had set up a theocracy and with the Bill of Rights, a theocracy was outlawed. But sadly there are those who wish to make this nation a theocracy, not a democracy.

 

[DC_DEEP]

Good point, GBO. Madame, you left out two fine fellows in your original post: Fred Phelps, and Ralph Reed. Ralphie boy is not a preacher (that I am aware of), but he is a very influential fundamentalist.

 

[madame_zora]

Oh trust me, you don&#39;t want me to post a list of MY personal faves, that list of quotes was already compiled on a flier being passed out by some church or another to encourage people NOT to just accept that all preachers speak the word of God. I found it somewhat inspiring that such a thought would come from a church group, and I was interested in hearing from the Christians here if they felt that these televangelist types were godly men or not, or if they were influenced by their thinking.

It seems to me that there are simply too many people who put their faith in anyone who says "Lord, lord" on tv. I know it&#39;s the case with bush, I talk to people everywhere I go. People who don&#39;t know the first thing about politics tell me they like him because he&#39;s a Christian and he&#39;s trying to put America "back on track"&#33; That kind of thinking is just blind acceptance of lies. Yes, I understand the concept of giving someone the benefit of the doubt, but what if they really ARE lying? How long is the whole world supposed to suffer so that one man or one small group can be given the benefit of the doubt? They&#39;ve failed to recognise how well organised and profitable this system is. Do they think it&#39;s by accident that all branches of government are now controlled by neocons and now the supreme court is being filled with them? They don&#39;t know what "theocracy" means or understand why separation of church and state is important. They apparently don&#39;t know why it&#39;s bad to use God and Jesus as political campaign firgureheads, which is the saddest thing of all.

As far as getting us back on track goes, they wish for an America that never was, not something that has always been. They want us to live the dream shown on Leave It To Beaver, but that world was never true, it was more tv propaganda aimed at placating our country after a harsh war. Why don&#39;t the masses get it that tv is being used to pass the imformation that advertisers want us to believe so that we&#39;ll buy products and politicians want us to believe to buy their platforms?

Most politicians have one primary objective- to get re-elected. Once they get to the level where their income is high they want to stay there. Even the ones who begin a career in politics as idealists wanting to change the world for the better have a hard time staying that way once they enter the political arena where bribes and kickbacks become a part of their reality, where who says something is more important that what&#39;s being said. "It is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to get to heaven", this doesn&#39;t mean that rich people are inherently evil, it means that they have different challenges than the rest of us could ever imagine. The America they live in is not the same as the one most of us occupy, it&#39;s not always just that they&#39;re insensitive, but it&#39;s almost always a case of them being out of touch with reality as it exists to us, and more about protecting their own interests and wealth.

Enter the neocons. These people are nothing new, they can trace their roots back to the Puritans. The difference in that the Puritans came here to escape oppression, the neocons are here to revive it. The quotes I offered at the beginning of this thread are fairly representative of how THEY see America, but most of the Christians who support them are nowhere near as radical as all that. What they fail to see is what their support is doing. By supporting anything these people do they are ushering in a new world order (not unintentional) that damns us all. Christians should be more upset than anyone about how the Bible is being bastardized into political propaganda, but alas, they are drunk on the wine of comfort, sedated by reassuring words that they are fighting the good fight. They are aggressively monitoring what they allow into their minds so that they can continue this illusion and feel good about who they are and what they are doing. Polled, they will tell you that the rest of the world respects America and "Won&#39;t fuck with us now&#33;" because we have a pres that has our back. America- fuck yeah&#33; Well, a simple read of a couple foreign newspapers would shatter that illusion like glass, we are more hated than ever before, more ridiculed than I care to think. I shudder to think what the next three years will bring.

 

[prepstudinsc]

This topic really is getting on my last nerve. As a Christian, I want to know why everyone feels the need to do this Christian bashing in several threads. Anyone with some common sense knows that anyone in politics is going to talk out of both sides of their mouths, so why bother to get all up in arms. One day they will say what the people who have given them money that day want. The next day it&#39;s supporting a cause of another lobbying group. They have a lot of people to keep "happy" and ultimately they&#39;ll end up making everyone mad.

Being Christian in the United States is an interesting experience. I don&#39;t agree with a lot of the televangelists&#39; tactics, because they go about the whole thing in the wrong way. Shoving religion down peoples&#39; throats is not the way to gain followers. Church is for the sinner, not for the righteous. We&#39;ve got to form relationships with people and actually live a Christian life to get people interested, but the goofs on tv turn people off. The thing about it is that most people you meet in church or even on the street who are Christian don&#39;t agree with what the tv preachers espouse or what the far right spouts off. That is a minority fringe group. They give us a bad name, just as the extremist Muslims give Islam a bad name. You can&#39;t judge a whole group by a handful of loudmouths who purport to speak for the whole group. To classify us all by the actions of a few is painting us all with a broad prush stroke and is pretty narrow minded for someone who claims to be open minded. So get off your high horses and stop spewing this garbage about stuff that you don&#39;t know about. What you read in papers and hear on the news is not the truth. Get in church and see for yourself what real Christians are.
You might be pleasantly surprised. You&#39;d be surprised at how many there are on the board, too.

 

[Bananaman]

OK, I shot my big mouth off, so I should clarify what I mean. The people I&#39;m specifically referring to when I say "holier-than-thou cretins" are the hypocrites. I do in fact know people who are "real Christians" and I completely agree that there&#39;s a world of difference between them and the average televangelist. I didn&#39;t mean to pick on anyone here, and on re-reading my post I realize that it did in fact come across as Christian bashing.

For the record, I have no problem with Christians per se, only with those who would pervert their faith with hatred and bigotry. Unfortunately, they tend to be the noisy ones.

To the real Christians here, my apologies&#33; To the hypocrites, my extended middle finger&#33;

B-man

 

[madame_zora]

Prep, did you READ any of my post at all? That&#39;s exactly what I said&#33; I KNOW most Christians don&#39;t believe the things the televangelists say, that was my point. Since when does asking questions qualify me as a "Christian basher"? I have posted many times about my long association with Christianity, my beliefs are a direct result of my own personal experience with churches, of which the vast majority was very wonderful. My specific interest in this thread was whether those HERE who identified themselves as Christians followed the beliefs of the televangelists I saw quoted on this flier I received, I thought I did a fair job of explaining that.

To say, "To classify us all by the actions of a few is painting us all with a broad prush stroke and is pretty narrow minded for someone who claims to be open minded. So get off your high horses and stop spewing this garbage about stuff that you don&#39;t know about. What you read in papers and hear on the news is not the truth. Get in church and see for yourself what real Christians are."- is to clearly demonstrate that you have not read anything I&#39;ve said and must think I&#39;ve never seen the inside of a church. Stuff I don&#39;t know about? Please&#33; I study in great detail, and have for quite a few years, I think I&#39;m as well qualified as anyone to have an opinion. Once again, I&#39;m NOT saying Christians are bad or wrong, perhaps sometimes too easily led. This opinion is based on seeing very large numbers of people sending money to these shady preachers and voting for politicians who spout such garbage. "The actions of a few"? Well, sorry, but somewhere near half of this country voted for bush, primarily in favor of his views on "family values" according to polls. I think it&#39;s good to reconcile our thinking with reality. Sorry if you don&#39;t like facts, you can ignore them if you like, that&#39;s what most people do.

For the record, those men ALL have huge followings, so it&#39;s absurd and unrealistsic to believe that no one but the fringe support their efforts. If you personally do not, that&#39;s great, but your opinion does not counterbalance the huge movement of the religious right. They exist, they are real and they are a powerful legislative force. To deny reality will not move anyone closer to fixing the problem. I am so far from being a Christian basher&#33; I am, however a hypocrite-basher, and proudly so. If you will read carefully, it is those who look down their nose at others while being sinners themselves that I always find intolerable. I&#39;ve said plainly, I DON&#39;T judge their spirituality, but I DO judge their use of their political power, as it affects my life and the movement of my country away from freedom for all.

 

[Freddie53]

Originally posted by madame_zora@Jul 15 2005, 11:37 AM



Enter the neocons. These people are nothing new, they can trace their roots back to the Puritans. The difference in that the Puritans came here to escape oppression, the neocons are here to revive it. The quotes I offered at the beginning of this thread are fairly representative of how THEY see America, but most of the Christians who support them are nowhere near as radical as all that. What they fail to see is what their support is doing. By supporting anything these people do they are ushering in a new world order (not unintentional) that damns us all. Christians should be more upset than anyone about how the Bible is being bastardized into political propaganda, but alas, they are drunk on the wine of comfort, sedated by reassuring words that they are fighting the good fight. They are aggressively monitoring what they allow into their minds so that they can continue this illusion and feel good about who they are and what they are doing. Polled, they will tell you that the rest of the world respects America and "Won&#39;t fuck with us now&#33;" because we have a pres that has our back. America- fuck yeah&#33; Well, a simple read of a couple foreign newspapers would shatter that illusion like glass, we are more hated than ever before, more ridiculed than I care to think. I shudder to think what the next three years will bring.

[post=329390]Quoted post[/post]​

Excellent post Jana.
I do want to make a clarification. While the Puritans came here to escape oppression back in England. They did not give freedom of religion to the people in their colony. Roger Williams was literally expelled from the colony for being a Bapist and he went on to establish his own colony. Many were declared witches and warlocks. If they admitted they were then they were drowned. If they refused to admit to being a witch or warlock, they were drowned for refusing to tell the truth. So all accused were punished.

So the neocons go back to the Puritans all right both the good and the bad and especially the bad. Interestingly though, the United Church of Christ the church that traces its history back toward the Puritans is the most liberal mainline church in America. Through the years the fundie and the "my way or the high way" groups have leaft that denomination.

 

[B_DoubleMeatWhopper]

I&#39;m sure my views will come as a surprise to no one. I give my respect to those who are sincere. I think that Billy Graham is sincere. I may not agree with much of what he preaches, but I respect the man&#39;s convictions. He&#39;s about the only one in the media limelight that does have my respect. Pat Robertson? He lost any admiration I might have had for him when he claimed that God told him to run for president. I used to have respect for Oral Roberts, but he lost it when he said that God would strike him dead if he didn&#39;t collect &#036;1 million in contributions. Jimmy Swaggart has a ministry based on poor theology and mocking those who don&#39;t follow him. After his scandal, anyone who still donates money to him deserves to be parted from his money. Jim and Tammy Faye? Do I even need to explain the problem there? Such so-called religious leaders have (or had) millions of followers believing they have a direct pipeline to God, and that scares me. We all know how I feel about Fred Phelps (no, I can&#39;t bring myself to call him &#39;Reverend&#39, but the good thing about him is that he has few followers outside of his family. When evangelists start to preach the message that we are all children of God, made in His image, and as such are deserving of love and respect, I might listen. The current trend of evangelists is to spout condemnation against anyone who doesn&#39;t believe exactly as they do. What I think interesting is that if these men had lived in the time of Jesus, they would never have followed such a rebellious rabbi like Jesus, that thorn in the side of religious conservatives. Jesus spoke against false prophets who would spread their poison in His name. I cannot help but think that His prediction has come to pass.

 

[brainzz_n_dong]

Prepstud put things quite well. What&#39;s the old song lyric, "I second that emotion"?

As "republican as I am", its only recently I&#39;ve committed to going to church, for a whole host of reasons that nobody would care to hear about today. As far as the names mentioned at the beginning of the thread, sometimes televangelists represent religion about as well as the Backstreet Boys represented true musical talent.

DMW mentioned the one person that, among those with a national or world-wide footprint, best exemplify (to me) a humble man trying to follow the path of God: Billy Graham. I was never able to attend any of his crusades but have watched all of him I can on TV and he, as much as anyone close to me, has inspired me in a spiritual way to try and be a better human being.

I&#39;m not stirring up an arugment with MZ or anyone, but any thread in here that has any possible relationship to anything religious goes from silence to bashing, quite often, in about 2.3 seconds. Maybe I&#39;ve said something along the way that I didn&#39;t mean to come off as bashing and I should apologize for it, I dont&#39; know. In the heat of writing a reply it&#39;s easy to floor the pedal. Maybe that&#39;s a lesson for left/right and religious/non-religious to remember.

That&#39;s all I have time for today, talk at you later.

Steve

 

[Dude!]

Why oh why do the jerks get the airtime?

frankly, I don&#39;t care what those people have to say, or those quotes on the first page. I don&#39;t have to agree with them - no-one does. The fact that what they&#39;ve said those things means that it&#39;s probably not wise to listen to their opinions.

Also, it seems people called Pat are angry. I will not name my child Pat -

my son will be called Horatio. My daughter, Prudence


just kidding&#33; I&#39;m not that cruel

 

[jonb]

Originally posted by Freddie53@Jul 14 2005, 10:33 PM
Jonb, you may be right. If you are you need to contact the people who publish all the World History books used in sixth grade and 10th grade. The "dictator" was onlly appointed when there was a need for "martial Law"

[post=329333]Quoted post[/post]​

Well, I just needed to nitpick you. It&#39;s all in their writings.

They did have some Greco-Roman institutions, though. Slavery, for example.

BTW, there wasn&#39;t a single Greek government. LOL

 

[prepstudinsc]

The thing about it is that the fringe people in any group usually end up being the ones seen the most because they are the ones who are easy to target. Why? For a number of reasons...they are usually the most vocal, they usually pull stupid stunts to get publicity, they do extreme acts in the name of their cause (whether it be anti abortion, anti gay, anti war, anti whatever). It just gets me mad that there are all sorts of posts on here against Christians, but none in support of us. There are a few lines in a few posts saying that people know that we are not all like the televangelists and the way out wackos, but everyone seems to categorize us like all the fundies. Well the thing about it is that even not all the fundies agree with the fundies. I&#39;m embarassed by the actions of some of them. I&#39;m a Republican, but I didn&#39;t vote for Bush. I feel it&#39;s time for a change. While I think that America needs some morals, I also know that there is a big gray area and that not everything is as black and white like all these lobbying groups want things to be.

Has anyone read this month&#39;s GQ? There is a scary article about how the group Christian Exodus has chosen my state, South Carolina, as the state in which they want their members to all move to to create a Christian haven. They think that they can influence legislators and create what will amount to a state theocracy.
Yes, SC is conservative, but to make it a "theocracy" scares me.
So you see, even as a Republican Christian, I don&#39;t agree with "them."

All I ask for is some equal time here. Not everyone has to agree with me on theological matters. I don&#39;t expect you to. I don&#39;t bash all the liberals, so why is there this utter hatred towards those of us who may have more conservative views. I&#39;ve got friends IRL who are far more liberal than I am, but we get along and we can discuss all sorts of topics in a rational way. On here, it&#39;s always like, "Christians are stupid. Republicans are wrong. They hate everyone." I can tell you that&#39;s not the case with 98% of us. You&#39;ve only seen the fringe. I could make the same statements about gay people from what I&#39;ve seen on tv--the portrayal of most gay people is that everyone is a big flaming queen, or cross dressing leather freaks, but because I have gay friends who totally are not that way, I know differently. I know gay people who are white collar professionals, who play sports, who unless they told you they are gay, you&#39;d just wonder why they didn&#39;t have a girl hanging on their arm. So since I don&#39;t gay bash on here, I just ask the same respect of the Christians.

 

[madame_zora]

Prep. I&#39;m at a loss. I posted a topic specifically asking people who identify themselves as Christians to give their opinions. I haven&#39;t been attacking anyone&#39;s posts, I let it go to page three I think beofre I even chimed back in. I wanted to know how Christians feel about the way the religion is being presented by the tv evangelists. As a person who loves the teachings of Christ, I personally am offended. I wondered if anyone else felt that way, further, I wanted to know how THEY (Christians) felt about government getting into religous theocracy. It&#39;s a fair question, not derrogatory and certainly equal time&#33; This is now my third post to the same effect on this one thread, please stop accusing me of posting with an attitude I don&#39;t have.

 

[prepstudinsc]

You&#39;ve got three threads going that are pretty anti-right wing, Jana. I don&#39;t have any anti-liberal, anti-agnostic threads going. It looks like I, the Christian Republican is more open minded. I don&#39;t agree with the Pat Robertson, James Dobson types. I don&#39;t think that they should be lobbying Washington. I don&#39;t think that Fred Phelps is a minister--he&#39;s a farce, hardly derserving of the title "reverend." He&#39;s bastardized the title. Jerry Falwell lives in an idealistic world where everyone and everything is perfect, but that&#39;s not how things really are. He needs to spend a day in the inner city and see that not everyone is like him--that people have drug habits, people struggle with poverty, people have broken homes, people have hurts--and the real Christians are the ones working in the trenches fighting those battles, helping those people, healing the hurting, ministering to the downtrodden. Those of us who have been given a lot are commanded to give back to those less fortunate. Even in my town I see churches who think of themselves as a sanctuary for the saints, not a haven for the sinners. My former church is one of those places...if you have ever committed any kind of sin, you&#39;re not welcome and it&#39;s made clear. However, my current church is totally the opposite. It&#39;s a place of hope--hope for those who have made mistakes, hope for those with needs. That&#39;s what a real Christian is...not one who always condemns, but one who raises up others.

 

[madame_zora]

Prep, Being silent certainly doesn&#39;t make you more open minded, sorry you feel it does.

I never said I wasn&#39;t "anti-right wing", I said I wasn&#39;t "anti-Christian". Those two are not synonymous, which was my point. "Right wing" refers to a political camp merged with a twisted conceptualisation of Christianity. Christians are wonderful people who follow a belief system based on a group of moral ideals. It is aimed at providing a path to enlightenment FOR THEIR OWN LIVES&#33; I still believe that these are the majority of Christians out there in the real world, and I suspect many of them do not like what is being done in the media by people professing to be Christian, then spewing out messages of hatred that make people think badly of what Christianity really is.

But "anti right-wing"? Hell yeah, and I don&#39;t share the opinion that silence equals open mindedness, nor did any person in history who ever got anything done. For that matter, I&#39;m not very open-minded about discrimination, nor do I plan to "investigate the other side", some things are just too obvious not to understand&#33;

If you think you are defending Christianity, you&#39;re wasting your breath, there is no need, I like Christianity. If you are defending the right-wing movement, I feel sorry for you. You are as free to state your opinions as anyone else, likewise anyone else is free to respond.